Talk:Consociationalism
Add topic | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | The content of Consociational state was merged into Consociationalism. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
UK? federation?
[edit]Since devolution in 1999 in the United Kindom, in which Scotland and Wales were granted their own parliament and assembly respectivly, Britain has been considered by some as a consociational democracy, although England and other areas like Cornwall have yet to receive their own indepedent parliament or assembly.--24.126.188.244 (talk) 03:00, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
- There's a difference betwen federalism and consociationalism, although the latter often involves the former. When you say "considered by some", do you have any sources? Cordless Larry (talk) 07:52, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Definition
[edit]Wikipedia articles should start with the definition of the thing they talk about. This one doesn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.110.29.67 (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Example - Province of Canada - an example surely?
[edit]I'm surprised that the Province of Canada from 1841 to 1867 isn't listed as an example. A quick scan of the literature suggests that the first example was in 1917 in the Netherlands. So what am I missing here - given the obvious parallels of Canada's Joint Premiers to Northern Ireland's First Minister and deputy First Minister. Obviously we can't list it, without any literature supporting this. Nfitz (talk) 17:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, that does look like consociationalism given the double majority system. Let's look for citations. Bondegezou (talk) 20:24, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Edits on 30 November and 1 December
[edit]An IP editor (not signed on) has twice edited the article to delete properly cited material without any explanation, has made opinionated (though arguably true but uncited) comments about Lebanon, and has added a long OpEd about Colombia that was unsupported by citations. I have reverted in each occasion per wp:BRD.
I invite the editor to stop the wp:edit war and use this talk page to make the case for the changes they want to make. Provided that the changes are supported by citation and proportionately sized, there should be no issue. --Red King (talk) 09:37, 1 December 2019 (UTC)